Nationals Arm Race

I just finished watching the Nats beat the Brewers in extra innings tonight, as Jayson Werth easily beat out a throw on an infield-in situation on a grounder from Adam LaRoche to first.  Even if Prince Fielder‘s throw hadn’t been high Werth had easily beaten the throw.

Why was Werth, not exactly the fastest player in baseball, that far down the line on an infield-in situation?  Well, because Milwaukee’s new manager Ron Roenicke employs a pull-hitter type shift on nearly every hitter, which means that with a lefty up in LaRoche, Milwaukee’s 3rd baseman was playing halfway to second base.  So Werth could literally run halfway down the line on each pitch and had no difficulties beating a throw home on Laroche’s sharp grounder.

Oh, by the way, the only way Werth was on 3rd to put himself into this position was by virtue of stealing 3rd base without even a throw from the catcher.  Again, how was he able to do this?  Because Milwaukee’s defensive alignment meant that there was little chance one of the middle-infielders would hold him on 2nd, and the 3rd baseman had to run 20 feet to cover the bag.

I’m sure the constant shift has been beneficial (else why would they constantly be doing it?)   But tonight I cannot remember one play where the shift helped out.  Perhaps one sharp grounder to 2nd baseman Richie Weeks put him into position to make a play he wouldn’t have normally, but Weeks couldn’t handle it and it went for a hit anyway.  In the earlier innings, in a 2-on 1 out situation, a ball DEAD to the typical positioning of a 2nd baseman (and what should have been a basic inning-ending double play ball) went for a single.   The 2nd baseman wasn’t within 30 feet of a ball that every other 2nd baseman in the league doesn’t have to move to field.  Instead of getting a double-play, the bases were loaded and Narveson eventually walked in 2 runners instead of being out of the inning.

Perhaps Roenicke is a genius and this is the wave of the future; all I saw tonight was a manager over-thinking his defense.  The Nats have batters who excel going to the opposite field (Morse, Espinosa, Ramos) and, while the shifting makes sense for pull-tendency hitters (LaRoche and Werth) they should have been playing other batters straight up.

A sad end to a great hitter's career. Photo: pul.se website, unknown origin

It really is a shame to see Manny Ramirez go out in the fashion that he has, scurrying away into retirement instead of facing a second PED suspension.  Actually, it was more of a shame to see his first suspension last year, which immediately cast him into a shameful collection of baseball players (McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Giambi, Sosa, and Palmeiro) who represented the best the game had to offer from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s, but who also defined an era of steroids, PEDs and rampant drug use throughout baseball and probably will never gain entry to the sports Hall of Fame (at least not while they’re alive in all likelihood).

What is amazing about both drug tests is the basic idiocy displayed in actually getting caught.  The baseball drug testing policy is already considered to be among the easiest and most basic to skirt, continually being criticized by the WADA for its lack of transparency and lack of accountability.  The CBA lays out exactly what drugs are being tested for, and the players pretty much know when and where they’re going to be tested.  The policy isn’t nearly as draconian as what (say) professional cyclists go through, yet players continue to use and get caught.  The fact that Ramirez got caught twice is really amazing.

Manny Ramirez retires with these amazing statistics:

• A career slash line of .312/.411/.585
• A career OPS of nearly 1.000 (final figure: .996 for his career)
• A career OPS+ of 154, roughly meaning he batted 50% better than the average major leaguer for his career.
• 555 career homers, averaging a homer every 14.8 plate appearances.
• 12 All star appearances, 9 silver sluggers and 11 seasons receiving MVP votes (most being consecutively from the years 1998-2006, not coincidentally the height of the steroid era).

Leaving steroid and PED use out of the equation, one can easily say Ramirez is one of the 4-5 best right handed hitters of the last half century.  He can be mentioned in the same breath as the likes of Willie Mays, Albert Pujols, Hank Aaron, and Frank Robinson in terms of being a complete hitter.

Yet, in the end his 2nd drug suspension will define his legacy.  He’ll never be in the Hall of Fame, not while we have a voter base that refused to elect Jeff Bagwell in his first year of eligibility, seemingly on the question of whether or not he “could have been using” despite not one shred of proof otherwise.

I’m of two conflicting thoughts on the eligibility considerations for players who used PEDs.  On the one hand, the most hallowed records in the game (single season home run and career home run records) were shattered by hitters who artificially enabled themselves to surpass the previous records and forever change the game.  Many of the hall voter base are long time baseball writers who grew up idolizing those players whose records were “stolen” by these modern day cheaters, and they will forever penalize the likes of McGwire, Sosa and Bonds for destroying the memory of Ruth, Aaron or Maris.  The 2013 hall of fame ballot especially highlights this issue and may be our best test case for how these players are treated.

On the other hand, the culture of the game at the time encouraged and fostered drug use during the mid 90s, and various opinions from players at the time put the overall usage across the entire league in the 75% range.  We didn’t discount the pitching performances of players in the dead ball era, nor do we ignore the performance of pitchers in the late 60s who dominated their counterparts during a small era of dominance.   We used to have dozens of batters hitting .400 prior to the turn of the century, yet now the best hitters in the league hit in the mid .300s at best.  Players in the early parts of the century played in a non-integrated sport, and players in the 60’s and 70’s notoriously used stimulants on a regular basis to make it through the grind of the season.  At some point voters need to realize that omitting an entire generation of players based on innuendo or suspicion is doing the game a huge injustice and destroying an entire generation of legacy that merits inclusion in the hall of fame.

There is no good solution.  At some point though we need to at least acknowledge this generation’s greatest players.  Unfortunately, it probably will take a veteran’s committee 30 years from now to do it.

This is the only time i’ve ever seen Burnett’s hat on straight. Photo: masnsports.com

6/30/2009: The Nationals and Pirates announce a trade:

• Nyjer Morgan and Sean Burnett coming to Washington
• Lastings Milledge and Joel Hanrahan going to Pittsburgh.

To Nationals faithful, the 6/30/2009 trade with the Pirates was a serious talking point.  It was the first major trade of the Mike Rizzo era after a contentious spring training that deposed Jim Bowden.  At the time of the trade, Milledge was sitting in AAA Syracuse after having hit .161 in April, and Hanrahan was busy compiling a 7.71 era while blowing as many saves (5) as he had successes as our closer.

We all know what happened next: Morgan came over, slotted into center field and had a career season.  And Burnett settled into the bullpen and gave us better-than-loogy performances that continue to today.  Milledge hit significantly better for Pittsburgh than had been hitting for us, and suddenly Hanrahan found the plate again and has morphed into a half-way decent late-inning option for the worst team in baseball.

At the time though, pundits far and wide talked about how the Pirates “fleeced” the Nats in the deal.  Here’s one take from a USA Today columnist, and here’s MLB Trade Rumor’s round up of the typical analysts and their comments like “easy win for the Pirates.”

I remember thinking at the time that baseball pundits seemed to constantly be in love with Lastings Milledge.  Nobody could see who he was as a player (immature, egotistical, uncoachable) or see his lack of accomplishments (he has a career 91 OPS+).  All they could see was his age and his “potential.”  (Hmm, reminds me of how Jim Bowden looked at *every* prospect)  Meanwhile, Hanrahan was somehow valued higher than Burnett despite the fact that he had a 1.9 whip for 2009 (as a closer!  That’s nearly two baserunners per inning for a guy you’re entrusting to finish wins) and he was a righty.  Burnett was an effective lefty and remains that way today.

Anyway.  When Milledge was non-tendered in December and then subsequently got into a massive brawl in the Venezuelan Winter League, I didn’t see any mea culpas from these pundits.  The Pirates, probably the worst-run team in baseball and with one of the smallest payrolls, didn’t want to gamble with a probably salary in the $1M range on Milledge turning it around for 2010.  He only lasted four at bats for the White Sox, who DFA’d him today.  He’s officially worn out his welcome for four teams now (New York, Washington and Pittsburgh and Chicago) inside of 5 seasons.

Of course, Milledge’s counterpart in the trade Nyjer Morgan was similarly jettissoned at the end of spring training when he lost out his starting center fielder job to Rick Ankiel.  Morgan was traded to Milwaukee for a low-A player (Cutter Dykstra) that Keith Law described as no better than an “organizational player.”  So now the trade looks more like Hanrahan for Burnett and Dykstra.  Who is winning now?  Burnett has been great for us, and while he’s not a 95-mph flame throwing back of the bullpen type he has been nothing but consistent, continuing to give better-than-loogy performances and now he seems slated as the closer-for-now.

There was so much vitriol in the blogosphere aimed towards the Nationals front office for this move that I feel like bringing it up.  I havn’t seen too many mea culpas out there from the same people who flamed the Nats at the time.

A running post, my answering the questions that Nats MLB beat writer Bill Ladson answers on a (mostly) weekly basis.  here’s Ladson’s 3/14/11 mailbox post with his answers.

Q: Is it too early to say Drew Storen lost his chance of being the team’s closer?
A: I think it was too early to say this even last year, when Storen was good but not fantastic in the closer role.  We wouldn’t have acquired a 103mph throwing Henry Rodriguez otherwise.  I think Storen *eventually* gets the role but until then its a mix between him, Tyler Clippard and Rodriguez depending on the night.  Riggleman likes to give relievers their assignments for the night ahead of time and seems certain to go closer-by-committee.

Q: Why do the Nationals keep taking chances on injured pitchers like Chien-Ming Wang and Cla Meredith, when a guy like Kevin Millwood is available?
A: Because Millwood was awful last year?  4-16, 5.10 era and an 83 ERA+.  Though he was effective in 2009, his 07 and 08 numbers were in line with his 2010 numbers.  2010 was the last year of a 5yr/$60M contract.  If the Yankees, who *desperately* need starters, aren’t biting on Millwood (or even Jeremy Bonderman) at this point then nobody will.  Besides, I’d much rather pay a 22-yr old prospect the major league minimum to put up a 5.00 era and a mid-80s ERA+rather than a veteran who would command 2-3 times more at a minimum.

Wang is a special case; I think the Nats spent the $1M guaranteed this year as a follow-on to their $2M investment last year.  $3M is a good gamble on a pitcher who won 19 games two years in a row in the AL East.  Meredith (i’m pretty sure) was NOT injured coming into the season, and his TJ diagnosis was a surprise.  He’s already released and should have only cost the team a few thousand in spring training stipends and meal monies.

By and large, it seems that you can gamble with one injury reclamation project per spring.  And they are good gambles; the league is filled with pitchers who have returned from major injuries on non-guaranteed contracts to contribute.

Q: With the Nationals signing first baseman Adam LaRoche to a two-year deal, have they lost faith in Chris Marrero, and should they consider trading him at this point?
A: It is a fair point.  I think the Nats got stuck between two situations; Marrero not being ready for a full time major league gig for 2011 and a quality first baseman not wanting to come here on a one-year deal.  So they bought 2 years of LaRoche and probably cost Marrero a year of development time.  They have not lost faith in him … but to rise to the majors as a first baseman you have to have 30+ homer power.  This isn’t the 80s when a skinny Don Mattingly-like first baseman can arise and prosper.  You need production out of that position.  Until Marrero displays that, he’s stuck in the minors.

Q: If Danny Espinosa starts off the season cold, who will come in as the second baseman?
A: Nobody, really.  The team is basically all in on both Desmond and Espinosa to start 150+ games at their respective positions this year.  Alberto Gonzalez is not a lock to make this team versus Alex Cora, and neither can really hit a lick.  Jerry Hairston can backfill but is no more than a role player at this point in his career.  There is a significant gap from the majors to our 2nd base prospects Kobernus (who has not played like a 2nd rounder at all) and Lombardozzi (who played well in the AFL but is still needing minor league time).  We all better cross our fingers these guys don’t get hurt or struggle badly.

Q: Do you see Jerry Hairston Jr. taking significant at-bats away from Espinosa and Ian Desmond — potentially retarding their progress?
A: Not at all; once-a-week starter and late inning defensive replacement to spell their legs during the grind.

Q: How can you be even remotely upbeat about Morgan? His base-running decisions last year were terrible and his foot speed is supposed to be his biggest offensive threat. I like the guy’s heart, but I doubt he’ll be anything but a disappointment this year.
A: I believe Morgan will break camp as the leadoff hitter/center fielder, but will probably only be given about 2-3 weeks to show he’s back on track at the plate before the team goes with Rick Ankiel or Roger Bernadina in center.  If this happens, Morgan’s time in the majors may be close to complete; he’s 30, has a history of behavioral issues from last year, and isn’t getting any faster or younger.

Q: Are you surprised that Laynce Nix is facing an uphill battle to make the Nationals’ 25-man roster?
A: Why would anyone be surprised that an outfielder on a non-guaranteed contract is having problems making a team with 5 outfielders on major league contracts?  Nix’s success was always insurance over the likes of Morse and Ankiel not working out.  If a team wants to trade for him, all the better.  He doesn’t exactly fit the Mike Rizzo defense-first profile of outfielders as it is.

Would a DUI arrest by Mickey Mantle have been such a big story? Photo: AP file

Why is ANY story about an athlete getting arrested for DUI that big of a news story?  While I do understand the ink about Miguel Cabrera‘s off-season DUI arrest (since his Alcohol issues caused him to miss games in a critical series two years ago for his team), recently I saw this link critiquing the reactions of three MLBers who got busted for DUI this past off-season (Cabrera, Austin Kearns and Adam Kennedy: side note is it ironic or just coincidental that the latter two are Nationals washouts?).  Then late last week one Coco Crisp was arrested for DUI as well.  I began to wonder; why are these revelations such big news stories?

Think about your job.  You probably sit in an office and stare at a computer 8 hours a day.  Your boss has no idea what you do the other 7-8 hours of your day, nor any idea what you do all weekend.  You could have a massive drug problem, or get arrested on a friday night and spend the whole weekend in jail … but as long as you show back up at work Monday, don’t miss any work and don’t miss any deadlines/don’t let it affect your work product … then who cares?

I guess the real answer is something along the following.  MLB players are celebrities now.  They’re for the most part multi-millionaries and live lives that most Americans cannot comprehend.  In today’s TMZ-inspired celebrity news cycle what used to pass as a personal matter is now rabidly reported as breaking, important news.  Do I care that Coco Crisp tied a few drinks on last weekend and (like a moron) got into his car and drove?  No, not really.  It may show bad judgement on his part but it has nothing to do with his performance on the field.  It certainly didn’t affect Wade Boggs‘ career (he was notorious for his beer drinking abilities, reportedly drinking “50-60” beers on cross country trips).

Will Jim Edmonds' defensive capabilities lift him to HoF status? Photo: www.vivaelbirdos.com

I know it is cliche, and that every baseball writer pens the same article whenever a big name retires.  But these opinion pieces are still fun to write and argue about.  So argue away.

Within the past week, two notable hitters hung up their spikes.  Gary Sheffield was forced to admit (much like Barry Bonds, Jermaine Dye and other aging DH-only players quickly being obsoleted in the fast, new, young MLB) that no team would hire him after sitting out all of 2010 and officially filed the paperwork with the league.  Meanwhile, Jim Edmonds retired from a lingering achilles heel injury that prevented him from suiting up in 2011.

For the sake of this article, we will exclude consideration of the fact that Sheffield has admitted to PED/Steroids use and thus probably faces little chance of making the hall.  Lets talk about their performances on the field.

Case 1: Gary Sheffield

Sheffield hails from the famous Hillsborough High School in Tampa, which also produced the likes of Dwight Gooden, Carl Everett and (infamously) Elijah Dukes.  Sheffield’s career numbers are strong.  He retires with a CAREER OPS+ of 140.  That’s essentially an entire career of production at the average level of what Ryan Zimmerman gave the Nats last season.  He hit more than 500 homers while also having more than 250 stolen bases.  He has a career slash line of .292/.393/.514, which is also great.  His hall of fame monitor and standard scores (Bill James’ creations that try to measure whether a player is HoF worth) both easily put him in. His closest comparison on baseball-reference is Mel Ott.  That’s heady company.

Awards: 9 times an all star, 7 times getting MVP votes (a 2nd, two 3rd and a 6th place finish).  5 silver sluggers.  Played 3B early, RF middle and LF/DH late in his career.  His best season was in 1997, finishing with a ridiculous 189 OPS+ for the Marlins but only finishing 6th in the MVP voting.

Beyond the Boxscore printed out an interesting Visual Hall of Fame graphic that essentially shows that Sheffield’s best seasons of his 22-yr career were in the latter part of his career, consistent with a steroids user who was able to beat back the hands of time and not diminish as he aged.  In the same way that Bonds did not tail off as he entered his late 30s.

Regardless of the steroids, I think he’s a hall of fame player.  He was a feared, ferocious hitter who clearly had 5-tools (though not quite at the 5-tool level of someone like Willie Mays or Ken Griffey).  He was a game changer who bounced around the league but produced wherever he was.  Unfortunately because of a prickly relationship with sports writers and implications in the BALCO scandal, his only chance of entrance will be 30 years from now by a veteran’s committee.  He’ll be on a very busy 2014 hall of fame ballot (other first timers on that ballot include near locks Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, and Tom Glavine, along with borderline cases Jeff Kent and Mike Mussina).

Case 2: Jim Edmonds

Edmond’s case is less about pure offensive merit but weighing the benefits of a player who can produce at a high offensive level AND provide fantastic defense.  Edmond’s career offensive numbers are good but not amazing; in 17 major league seasons he hit 393 homers, had a respectable career slash line of .284/.376/ .527, and a career OPS of 132.

Those numbers compare pretty favorably to Sheffield’s career lines when you consider that Edmonds was considered among the best 2-3 outfielders in the game for the middle 10 years of his career.  He earned 8 gold gloves for his work in centerfield and has a litany of high-light reel catches to his credit. He was excellent defensively but this did not correlate to raw speed on the base-paths; he retired with only 67 stolen bases for his career, averaging just four a year.   His diving catches helped contribute to his demise; he was frequently injured, missed the entirety of 2009 and hung it up because he was not going to be medically cleared to play this year.

Career Achievements: 8th in his Rookie voting, 4 time all star, 6 times receiving MVP votes (a 4th and a 5th place vote his best achievements).

Bill James’ Hall of Fame metrics are not quite as kind to Edmonds; he falls short in both the Monitor and the Standard.  His most similar player comparison is to one Ellis Burks, not really a flattering comparison.

Is he a hall of famer?  I say “probably.”  When grading the defensively minded players (shortstops, catchers and athletic center fielders) you have to balance offensive and defensive.  With Edmonds, he’s nearly the hitter of Sheffield with fantastic defense. I’m concerned by the lack of MVP consideration, and lack of all-star selections.  If a player isn’t routinely considered among the best players in the game, how can he be a hall of famer?

He’ll be on the 2015 ballot along with first timers (and locks) Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez and John Smoltz.  So he may have to wait to get in but he should merit it.

Courtesy of Beyond the Boxscore, here’s a quick look at Vegas Over/Unders for teams for 2011.

First thoughts looking at this:

– The AL East looks all jacked up.  The Yankees look high.  91 wins versus 86 for the Rays?  I don’t think the Rays are going to fall that far.  Meanwhile Toronto won 86 games last year … do we think the trades of Marcum and Wells are going to cost them 10 wins?  And the Red Sox might actually be low.  They come into 2011 healthy and stacked.

– NL East: 97 wins is tough to argue with for Philly … but why isn’t Atlanta in the 90+ game range?  They won 91 last year and should only improve as their young guys get better.

– Oakland; won 81 games last year, added hitting, has one of the deepest young rotations in the game … and only is predicted to improve a game and a half?  I think they’re winning closer to 90 than 80 games this year.

– An aside about Detroit; what exactly are they getting for their money?  $133M in payroll last year bought them a .500 season, and while they have some very bad contracts coming off the books they’re still in the 9-figure range.

– Milwaukee: this one shocks me.  Only 84.5?  They added Greinke and Marcum, two guys who will give them a shutdown 1-2-3 rotation.  And they have a battering ram middle of the order (Weeks, Fielder, Braun and Hart).

– Lastly the Nats at 72 wins.  Hmm.  3 game improvement over last year.  I’d bet the over… I’ll predict that we improve 5-6 games over last year’s team.  I think simply the opportunity of getting a few more “competent” starts out of guys like Marquis, Zimmermann, and Gorzelanny versus what we got out of Atilano, Martin and Olsen last year will make a huge difference.  Yes we’ve lost some offense, but we’ve also improved defensively across the board.

Will Bagwell be a first ballot Hall of Famer? Photo bill37mccurdy.wordpress.com/

As noted in my previous Bert Blyleven rant post, from the looks of the baseball blogosphere lately, it is part of my duty as a baseball blog writer to put in my 2 cents on the 2011 Hall of Fame ballot.

On Jan 5, 2011, Hall of Fame BBWAA voting will be announced and we’ll have an entire week of blog postings doing post-vote analysis.  Its a great little way to fill the time in-between insignificant FA signings but before pitchers and catchers report.

I posted previously just about Blyleven, one of the most talked about candidates in some time.  I don’t think he’s a Hall of Famer but I think he’ll get voted in.  Here’s a quick rundown of the rest of the ballot.

————————————-

First, the returning candidates from previous years

– Roberto Alomar: Received 73.7% of the vote in his first year in 2010.  Probably penalized for being a complete jerk to sports writers for most of his career, and for the infamy that has followed him since he retired (HIV infection lawsuits and restraining orders).  Unfair that he wasn’t a first ballot hall of famer.  10 gold gloves puts him in pretty restrictive company.  12 straight all star games, numerous MVP vote gathering seasons.  Retired rather early for a middle infielder at 36.

Verdict: Should be a lock for HoF.

Other’s on returning ballots:
– Jack Morris: i’d vote for him before Blyleven.
– Barry Larkin: unfair comparisons to current power-hitting short stops are leaving Larking behind.
– Lee Smith: Saves are overrated to begin with, and Smith never seemed like he was as dominant as his contemporaries.
– Edgar Martinez: great guy, great hitter, one dimensional.
– Tim Raines: Why he has lost candidacy points i’ll never know.  Probably due to his later Yankee years souring the east coast sportswriter crew on his career in general.

– Trammell, Mattingly, McGriff, Parker, Murphy: all these guys are probably destined to be eventually included by some veterans committee 30 years from now, when we have recovered from the steroids era and we realize that a guy like Murphy and his 398 career homers isn’t that bad.

————————————-
Requisite Steroid-Accused HoF Candiates.

– Mark McGwire: Yeah he used.  But he was also quite a hitter prior to his using.  5 years run of 52-58-58-70-65 home run seasons.  A shame.  He’ll never get in.

————————————-
First time on 2011 Ballot.

– Rafael Palmeiro: probably the dumbest steroids user on the accused list.  He’s the punchline of the era and I’ll be surprised if he garners 10% of the vote.

– Jeff Bagwell: He should be a HoF lock, the first we’ve had in a while.  But i’m hearing rumbling that not a ton of guys are supporting him.  It may just be a matter of time before he gets in but he’s deserving.

– Larry Walker: excellent career OPS+ numbers clearly inflated by playing in Colorado.  He really could hit though, leading the league in batting average 3 times and homers once.

– Juan Gonzalez: one or two great seasons and then a mess of a career.  Hey at least he made a ton of money.

– Kevin Brown: amazing to think he’s been retired for 5 years.  His career will be defined by his ridiculous 9-figure contract.
————————————-

No one else on the 2011 ballot in my opinion will be close.

In summary, If I had a vote here’s my ballot: Alomar, Bagwell, Morris, Larkin, Raines, McGwire, Trammell.

Here's Bud Selig pretending he can't hear ongoing criticisms of his leadership. Photo courtesy of blogs.ajc.com

By now we’ve all heard about Bud Selig‘s expansion plans for the playoffs.  He would like to add 2 wild card teams to each post season, presumably having either a sudden-death or a best-of 3 series between them in order to determine who moves on into the conventional Divisional Series.

Here’s the main, singular problem I have with the plan.  It virtually guarantees that the griphold that AL East powerhouse teams New York and Boston have on the playoffs will continue.

Here’s a quick rundown on the AL East playoff representatives since the wild card was introduced after the players strike in 1994.

2010: Yankees (Rays)
2009: Yankees and Boston
2008: Boston (Rays)
2007: Yankees and Boston
2006: Yankees
2005: Yankees and Boston
2004: Yankees and Boston
2003: Yankees and Boston
2002: Yankees
2001: Yankees
2000: Yankees
1999: Yankees and Boston
1998: Yankees and Boston
1997: Yankees (Orioles)
1996: Yankees (Orioles)
1995: Yankees and Boston

In the last 15 years, to summarize:

• The Yankees missed the playoffs just ONCE.
• The Red Sox made the playoffs 9 of 15 years.
• Both teams combined to make 23 of 30 possible appearances in the post season.
• Other teams in the AL east made the playoffs a grand total of 4 times.
• The Yankees and Red Sox BOTH made the playoffs in 8 of those 15 years.  HALF the time.

Lets take a quick peek at the standings for the past few years to see who would have benefited from a 2nd wild card:

2010: Boston and San Diego
2009: Texas and San Francisco
2008: Yankees and NY Mets
2007: Detroit/Seattle (tied) and San Diego
2006: White Sox and Philadelphia
2005: Cleveland and Philadelphia
2004: Oakland and San Francisco
2003: Seattle and Houston
2002: Boston/Seattle (tied) and LA Dodgers
2001: Minnesota and San Francisco
2000: Cleveland and LA Dodgers
1999: Oakland and Cincinnati
1998: Toronto and San Francisco
1997: Anaheim and NY Mets/LA Dodgers (tie)
1996: Boston/Chicago/Seattle (tie) and Montreal
1995: California and Houston

So, had a 2nd wildcard been in place it would have increased the Boston/Yankee playoff appearance ratio from 23 of 30 to at least 25 of 30 and possibly 27 of 30 places since 1994.

Why not just guarantee the two teams berths and have the rest of the league play for 3rd place??

Coincidentally, what was going on in the AL East just prior to the Wild Card era?  Take a look:

1993: (toronto)
1992: (toronto)
1991: (toronto)
1990: Boston
1989: (toronto)
1988: Boston
1987: (detroit)
1986: Boston
1985: (toronto)
1984: (detroit)
1983: (Baltimore)
1982: (milwaukee)
1981: Yankees
1980: Yankeees

The Players strike ended a nifty run of 4 divisional titles (and 2 World Series victories) in 5 years for the Toronto Blue Jays, who have not appeared in the post season since.  The strike clearly caused a shift in baseball viewing habits for both Canadian franchises, and resulted in the outright removal of the Montreal franchise (and subsequent firesale/gift for new Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria).

I realize that the MLB has drastically fewer playoff teams as a percentage of the league.  Here’s a quick table:

Even adding 2 more wild cards would only increase MLB’s percentage to 30%, still lower than the parsimonious NFL.  But to what end?  Others have noted that this would mean longer seasons, world series drifting into mid-November, competing and losing to the NFL in ratings, bleeding into an already busy sports period, etc.

Just about the only benefit I can see would be having 2 wild card teams beating each other up and exhausting their rotations just before taking on the #1 regular season team.    The last thing I want to see as a baseball purist is a wild card team like the 1997 Florida Marlins sneak into the playoffs on a hot streak and luck their way to a world series title.  At least extra wild card teams would help prevent that from happening.

A younger, thinner, harder throwing version of Javier Vazquez. Photo courtesy of baseball.dailyskew.com

11/28/10 update: possibly obsoleting much of this, the Marlins have reportedly signed Vazquez to a one year deal.

As the FA hot stove gets hotter, more and more players have the “Nationals” name attached to them as intereted parties.  None more so than Javier Vazquez and Brandon Webb.  The question we as Nats fans should have is the following: Are Vazquez and Webb really worth going after?

Javier Vazquez, despite being the answer to one of my favorite trivia questions ever (what major league player has the highest scoring Scrabble last name?) seems to be more famous for the players he’s been traded for over the years (he was the primary chip in trades involving Nick Johnson, Randy Johnson, Chris Young, and Melky Cabrera) than he has been for his pitching.  At age 34 he’s 152-149 for his career for a barely-better than average 105 era+ value.

He has shown that he can be great (2009 for Atlanta) and he can be mediocre (his two seasons in NY and two other seasons in Chicago).  He’s never missed a start in the majors, though the Yankees took him out of their starting rotation towards the end of last season for a bit after a series of poor outings.

Question is: rumors abound that he’s lost his velocity.  Is this true?  Lets take a look at Pitch F/X.  Here’s samples from three games last year (the box score is linked to the date and the Pitch FX data is linked to a mentioning of speed):

1. June 6th: probably his best game of the year.  7 innings, 1 hit, 9ks (though 4 walks).  Again his avg fastball is around 89 but he maxed out at 91.7.

2. July 26: a decent performance middle of the season.  About the exact same figures as on 6/6; 89.22 average, 91.6 max.

3. Sept 29: his final appearance of the year, a loss against Toronto where he got shelled.  Here he was averaging
89, max of barely 90 on his fastball.  Hmm.  not good.

Now Lets look at 2009, when he finished 4th in Cy Young voting (which really means, he received one vote from one of the stat nerd voters who decided NOT to vote for Carpenter because he missed a few starts).  Here’s a random game from the middle of the season.

1. June 11: Vazquez goes 8 innings, gives up 2 hits and strikes out 12 hapless Pirates.  Interesting: he was
throwing an average of 91.43, max of 93.5.

So, his average fastball MPH has dropped nearly 3.5 mph between mid 2009 and the end of 2010.  Not good.  This did not go without notice in the NY press and blogs.  Federal Baseball pulled out some great links and wrote a similar article to this a few days ago.

Here’s one last visual aid; Fangraphs historical pitch velocity maps. In the mid-late 2007 he was averaging 93-94 with peaks of 97-98.  Now, he’s spent an entire year averaging 88-89 with peaks of no more than 92-93.  That’s a significant drop off and may be indicative of Vazquez’s utility as a power pitcher coming to an end.  The same thing happened to Livan Hernandez and he adjusted, but clearly Livan isn’t the ace starter that the Nats really kinda need.

—————————–

So, how about Brandon Webb?  We’re already reading how Rizzo likes Webb dating to his AZ days and we’re seeing pundit predictions and beat writer stories that Webb is coming to the Nats on a one-year reclamation project.

Webb’s history over the last 2 years:
– Made opening day start 2009, shoulder hurt, went on DL with Bursitis, surgery in august.
– Tried comeback 2010, never got off DL.  Pitched in the instructional league after the end of the season.  In those three instructional league games, here’s his performance summary:

• 9/29/10: 1 inning, fastball at 81mph.
• 10/2/10: 81-84mpg
• 10/7/10: 2 innings, fastball low-80s, top mid-80s.

Webb got 2 innings in his last of three Instructional league start and was, per this report, was sitting “in the low-80s and topped in the mid-80s.”    Stated another way, “Webb has thrown in front of scouts multiple times, according to several reports, and in his most recent session his fastball reached four or five miles per hour below his typical velocity.”

Perhaps this is just a tentative guy, trying to work his way back.  In fact, if he was indeed pitching at just 90% of his effort after so long a time off, then mid 80s is just fine.

Webb was never a terribly hard thrower.  His fangraphs velocity chart from his healthier 2007 and 2008 show a consistent mid-to-upper 80s (88.5), with peaks into the low 90s.  His strength is in a serious sinker, that batters drive into the ground and cannot hit hard, consistently.

Conclusion:
– Take a flier on Webb.  I’d go 1yr $5M with $1M incentives at 15,20,25 and 30 games started to push total value to 1yr $9M.  And i’d get a club option at $10M for a second year.
– Stay away from Vazquez.  He’s trending downwards and is in Jose Contreras territory.

Coming soon: similar thoughts about Carl Pavano and Jorge de la Rosa.